IRRESPONSIBLE
POLITICAL LEADERSHIP, PREDATORY POLICING SYSTEM AND THE HOPE OF A
PEOPLE THAT ARE LIVING IN A CONJECTURED UNITY. (By kay Aderibigbe)
Nigeria
is an example of a federal country on paper, but it does not qualify as
a federal entity in reality. This is because Nigeria does in reverse
what other federal countries do appropriately. In fact, like I said
elsewhere, 'Nigeria cannot be described as a normal country despite that
the UN charter sees her as one, but rather, it is a mere political camp
or assemblage of some lost citizens'.
My
reasons stem from the crisis of leadership deficit that characterizes
Nigeria from independence till now. It is not a matter of an unsuitable
system of governance or unworkable types of policy narratives, it is all
about failures of individuals and groups to deliver on certain roles
and responsibilities that they were saddled with. This, being the direct
result of intentional compromises that pave ways for systemic failure.
It
is the same Nigerian type of institutional inertia, lack of motivation
to rendering services after being paid with taxpayers' money and the
syndrome of 'public service is no man's work' that has made the Nigerian
police force to sink into the abyss of unconstitutional behaviour and
unprofessionalism such as: commercial public policing system, protection
for the VIPs/highest bidders only, victimization of the ordinary
citizens, lip-service, bribery, kidnapping, extrajudicial killings and
other predatory inclinations.
The rot within
the Nigerian police hierarchy has become an institutional norm to the
extent that nothing else matters; even, their primary role of safeguarding lives and property. But only money and monetary rewards. In
fact, if money has to be delivered via an anti-people or anti-police
ethics, the Nigerian police, most especially, SARS will do everything to
get the money.
The unit within the Nigerian
police known as SARS (Special Anti-Robbery Squad), which was set up with
the intention of managing a team of capable officers that can confront
heavily armed criminals, though, in its heyday did exceptionally, but
has in the recent times degenerated into a gang of criminals, and as
such, become armed robbers of morals, lives and material items. It is
against this backdrop that the Nigerian youths in their teeming numbers
decided to take to the streets in order to protest the disbandment of
the dreaded group.
This same group of SARS
officers was recently disbanded by the current incompetent Inspector
General of the Nigerian police in February 2020. The same IGP had
earlier ordered the decentralization and reformation of the same group
in January of 2019, which did not happen. The typical manifestation
of political irresponsibility and predatory policing system was at play
when the vice President of Nigeria, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo ordered that
SARS be reorganized in August 2018. This was because the same SARS
failed to hearken unto the voice of another former IGP Mr. Ibrahim Idris who
once directed that the group be overhauled in 2017.
What
is it about political pronouncements and failure of public officials,
administrators and appointed personnel to deliver on their roles? The
problem is that there exists a seriously strained relationship between
the state and the people on a sociological context. There is also a
distrust between the elites who hold power in trust for the people and
the public service on a psychological level. Lastly, there is no nexus
between the projects of the Nigerian state, designed by the elites, and
the yearnings and aspirations of the people.
All
the aforementioned factors could be traced to the deficiencies that
came with the idea of 'Nigeria's forced unity' and the purpose for which
the said unity was coagulated. Despite that emergent realities of post-colonial Nigeria does not attach much relevance to the idea of
unity but instead, pure work ethics, democracy, education,
liberalization and global reasoning. An average Nigerian politician
still blindly lays so much emphasis on the idea of unity to the exclusion
of a host of other factors that have experimentally propelled other
countries towards development.
Let us consider
the mechanism of Nigeria's forced unity and whether it is appropriate
for the youths or any group to aspire or clamour for changes despite the
fact that our rulers always frown at agitations, civil society
movements and new ideological suggestions by the masses.
The
1999 constitution in its first chapter, under the General provisions,
part 1, Section 2(1) stated categorically that "Nigeria is one
indivisible and indissoluble sovereign state to be known by the name of
Federal Republic of Nigeria". This very assertion is a systematic method
of bonding the society together. But can we say the bonding is
logically reasonable? Has it been profitable to all and sundry? Is the
bonding even necessary in the first place?
According
to Leo Dare, in a work reproduced by Peter Ekeh (1985), "we might have
to admit that the intentions of the earliest constitutional makers were
good, but how do we conceptualize the perennial bondage that was created
for the unborn generations by those who prioritized unity over
development"? To buttress this line of argument, of what use is unity
when suspicion, intolerance, in-built tensions, religious and cultural
differences are the underlying factors of political participation? What
amount of unity could be sufficient to engender a fair legal system,
equal rights, balanced economy and a society where one can boast of a
utilitarian government? These questions are part of the national debate
today; and we have to answer these questions in order to unravel the
mystery behind the bondage of the Nigerian state which seems to remain
perpetual.
What can make the bondage of a
society legitimate? The moral purpose for which a political rule exists
is to ensure that authority is limited and it is exercised in accordance
with popular law. A law simply gains popularity when it is relative,
definite, flexible, just and derives its value or strength from the
people upon whom it is meant to guide. The law that bonds the Nigerian
people lacked the characteristics of a popular law - since its authority
is not societally inherent and the law is dependent on a body of
power-recyclers (elites), as against the people from whom political
sovereignty is derived.
Do people have the
moral right to go against the law? Revolts against a law could stem from
the fact that people don't feel connected, involved, represented or
protected by the mentality which informed the law in the first place. If
the state or any of its agencies repress, subdue or crush groups who
challenge the compulsory unity of Nigeria for instance, then, the said
unity is more important to the government than the people. In the same
vein, justifiable resistance according to Thomas Hobbes is a public act
of a whole people, and the right is safe guarded by the moral condition
that those who resist are responsible for seeing that their action is
less injurious to the society (general good) than the abuse which they
are trying to remove.
Invariably, the
preponderance of attendant effects of the forceful bonding of Nigeria is
manifested in the 'I don't care attitudes' of those that are in
positions of authority because the majority of them feel more responsible
to their immediate constituencies rather than Nigeria as a whole. The
multiplier effect therefore, is seen in the pattern of our 'conjectural
unity' - which poses psychological trauma for the people, and also makes
governance administratively enigmatic for the participatory public.
For
instance, the quota system was introduced into the Nigerian system in
order to promote ethnic participation, instead of a merit based
recruitment system. This idea is a major setback to Nigeria in all
ramifications. So many unqualified administrators in the public service
are not supposed to be in power but they are there in the name of
Nigeria unity. Some police officers who corrupted SARS for instance, do
not have basic human relations education but they are drafted into the
force through the idea of state of origin and population
representation.
With the magnitude of
institutional decadence that pervaded all facets of human endeavours in
this country, the question is, how do we get rid of the rot that is
entrenched in our system even, if all the seven points agenda being
canvassed by the protesting youths are addressed? If the current
political regime affords us the political space to speak well, it is
better we clamour for a complete restructuring or we go back to the old
regional type of government. But if they (the political elites) choose
to muzzle us out, it is better we revolt at once and undertake a
political upheaval that will reset the whole system and break the
country into pieces one and for all.
If the
youths dare play into the hands of these old folks that have mastered
the Machiavellian arts, or the youths join forces in ruling this
shattered country with the political elites pari passu, we shall
certainly fail just like them; and they will label us as 'not being a
better set of political managers that can do no good'. The reason is, as
long as the quota system is the engine upon which the civil service is
being run, it is doubtful if this country can know a better day. (Kay
Aderibigbe 2020)
